[mpls] FW: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-02.txt

Chandrasekar Ramachandran <csekar@juniper.net> Fri, 11 August 2017 12:39 UTC

Return-Path: <csekar@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mpls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E38FE1324A4 for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 05:39:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.801
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.801 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-2.8, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=juniper.net
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9KVrZq3Agy1I for <mpls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 05:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM02-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-sn1nam02on0123.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.36.123]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32FB8132473 for <mpls@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 05:39:45 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=juniper.net; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=2vRBpn54Rjo+LO2jNER/Z02S5m1Kql9EUY6frwDO9Uw=; b=bEg3cezklv9BVJJE/hrHcNjHRX0sU+K4ev8p13/35qkhk+Upnhxll66bhqRyKFCmcJHIVFr7FBq6A04Vf9UQPnEzbmCRhFdPLUhT7NRBvM1eDoN90Z2s30DhZIhtc8AYWfo5odvn9tdxMeTSN3cJVl4K54BH8IkRnwJNSZ8ILc8=
Received: from BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.160.117.11) by BN3PR0501MB1553.namprd05.prod.outlook.com (10.161.217.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P256) id 15.1.1341.9; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:39:43 +0000
Received: from BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.117.11]) by BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com ([10.160.117.11]) with mapi id 15.01.1341.019; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:39:43 +0000
From: Chandrasekar Ramachandran <csekar@juniper.net>
To: "mpls@ietf.org" <mpls@ietf.org>
CC: Vishnu Pavan Beeram <vbeeram@juniper.net>, Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>, "n.leymann@telekom.de" <n.leymann@telekom.de>
Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-02.txt
Thread-Index: AQHTEpzKl/dh2PUFYUuiiJO+G9uwQqJ/FUIg
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:39:43 +0000
Message-ID: <BN3PR0501MB137729D071260C7EEB5C2DB9D9890@BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
References: <150245427252.24449.5189032955579607299.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
In-Reply-To: <150245427252.24449.5189032955579607299.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=csekar@juniper.net;
x-originating-ip: [116.197.184.11]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; BN3PR0501MB1553; 6:HqH039OkLfDhkkqzictgDHvvxRHv6UluGRnxCoMO2AKWBDnmJhUe7ONVVgi1fczHUY0W1JzD2BISvK2uIi1GRTVbkiplB5noDFOo8kcJH/rmYozcmdTWD7XBK8NIBAgrPcWz38veGGIG1tXpCfyQGhQppDuSLdrCwBLXA/evaivgfarSEary8nqNsdd2iLhADW0EutS3wXC1R7NoGxplDcMgCXY6DSCA0GcLkyUIcmpsUhGm7BztbXqPXiVaOm31fBrERrLanzmidnE25ipMa81S/k83UG+d5nzzwu14RL8fTnkw71Nn2a/LMd5RGQ1d2U7K5+RQWWK4tgk1YgTbDA==; 5:2fsEi2ypXGLGO0jpB5IlERQAzX2AZ4jHVA76rXvBMlfNeV4p5dARo4gqfWJL4EUynsvtKuVGZWThn/1HMYVytRhCJdjivZWx/8XThEYCNpEyvBwC2zp+voAauLyCnyqf9J0XtfC9GxRiEMkP+/fCzA==; 24:BkzekhRGLaDFzzamlYlXELfwIUmqvBb4U9tFntRC5UoADt4bDFGiTA2NoRJuWgtaZB/CxXniVACUPzk1i5VFbpIVgtHFRcR616DZPf+KhPE=; 7:G/UL64mppF2SH5HcxPw6KeS2nvZBY5DvGzCHFhu3aByGkgJ6rkh+YLd82NkqhzMpwbq80uFr1y//8x1NEZkkdMyU+f5o4Hb/qdKXsLXHcEG2S/y7WnaKeKicqMaEzYfd+8L+hxV6ryLBBN9LkLVOo1how5Vml0Vusk+NkuHFL1OUrrUyaj2/s/A6fcuhQHQpUFKRZ1OFmrNflH6GrQy21TpTIy0icfPKjHQp3n7Q/Wk=
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: dbf24556-51cd-470f-322a-08d4e0b60ab9
x-ms-office365-filtering-ht: Tenant
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(300000500095)(300135000095)(300000501095)(300135300095)(22001)(300000502095)(300135100095)(2017030254152)(48565401081)(300000503095)(300135400095)(2017052603031)(201703131423075)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(300000504095)(300135200095)(300000505095)(300135600095)(300000506095)(300135500095); SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1553;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BN3PR0501MB1553:
x-exchange-antispam-report-test: UriScan:(120809045254105)(138986009662008)(211936372134217)(95692535739014)(153496737603132)(154440410675630);
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <BN3PR0501MB1553C629D26A2D5231445639D9890@BN3PR0501MB1553.namprd05.prod.outlook.com>
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000700101)(100105000095)(100000701101)(100105300095)(100000702101)(100105100095)(6040450)(601004)(2401047)(5005006)(8121501046)(10201501046)(3002001)(100000703101)(100105400095)(93006095)(93001095)(920507026)(6055026)(6041248)(20161123562025)(20161123560025)(20161123555025)(20161123564025)(201703131423075)(201702281528075)(201703061421075)(201703061406153)(20161123558100)(6072148)(201708071742011)(100000704101)(100105200095)(100000705101)(100105500095); SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1553; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000800101)(100110000095)(100000801101)(100110300095)(100000802101)(100110100095)(100000803101)(100110400095)(100000804101)(100110200095)(100000805101)(100110500095); SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1553;
x-forefront-prvs: 03965EFC76
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(6009001)(39860400002)(37854004)(13464003)(199003)(377454003)(189002)(377424004)(305945005)(6436002)(2473003)(6306002)(229853002)(54356999)(76176999)(50986999)(86362001)(9686003)(14454004)(105586002)(478600001)(15650500001)(54906002)(97736004)(110136004)(7736002)(34040400001)(2900100001)(53546010)(5640700003)(74316002)(2906002)(189998001)(55016002)(99286003)(53936002)(966005)(81166006)(2950100002)(6916009)(8676002)(2351001)(25786009)(7696004)(3660700001)(2501003)(6506006)(5660300001)(101416001)(77096006)(106356001)(4326008)(66066001)(230783001)(33656002)(1730700003)(81156014)(3846002)(3280700002)(68736007)(8936002)(6116002)(102836003)(42262002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:BN3PR0501MB1553; H:BN3PR0501MB1377.namprd05.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; PTR:InfoNoRecords; A:1; MX:1; LANG:en;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: juniper.net does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: juniper.net
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 11 Aug 2017 12:39:43.3411 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: bea78b3c-4cdb-4130-854a-1d193232e5f4
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BN3PR0501MB1553
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mpls/UQf8mdtPRUeuyZHdm2z9rhNK2a0>
Subject: [mpls] FW: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-02.txt
X-BeenThere: mpls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Multi-Protocol Label Switching WG <mpls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mpls/>
List-Post: <mailto:mpls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls>, <mailto:mpls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:39:48 -0000

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-02.html

We just posted revision 2 of the draft with editorial changes relating to the text involving references to summary FRR draft (diff given below).

https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-01&url2=draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-02

Thanks,
Chandra.

-----Original Message-----
From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org] 
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 5:55 PM
To: Ina Minei <inaminei@google.com>om>; Dante Pacella <dante.j.pacella@verizon.com>om>; Chandrasekar Ramachandran <csekar@juniper.net>et>; Tarek Saad <tsaad@cisco.com>om>; Chandrasekar Ramachandran <csekar@juniper.net>
Subject: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-02.txt


A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-02.txt
has been successfully submitted by Chandra Ramachandran and posted to the
IETF repository.

Name:		draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr
Revision:	02
Title:		Refresh Interval Independent FRR Facility Protection
Document date:	2017-08-11
Group:		mpls
Pages:		24
URL:            https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-02.txt
Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr/
Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-02
Htmlized:       https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-02
Diff:           https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-mpls-ri-rsvp-frr-02

Abstract:
    RSVP-TE relies on periodic refresh of RSVP messages to synchronize
    and maintain the LSP related states along the reserved path. In the
    absence of refresh messages, the LSP related states are
    automatically deleted. Reliance on periodic refreshes and refresh
    timeouts are problematic from the scalability point of view. The
    number of RSVP-TE LSPs that a router needs to maintain has been
    growing in service provider networks and the implementations should
    be capable of handling increase in LSP scale.

    RFC 2961 specifies mechanisms to eliminate the reliance on periodic
    refresh and refresh timeout of RSVP messages, and enables a router
    to increase the message refresh interval to values much longer than
    the default 30 seconds defined in RFC 2205. However, the protocol
    extensions defined in RFC 4090 for supporting fast reroute (FRR)
    using bypass tunnels implicitly rely on short refresh timeouts to
    cleanup stale states.

    In order to eliminate the reliance on refresh timeouts, the routers
    should unambiguously determine when a particular LSP state should be
    deleted. Coupling LSP state with the corresponding RSVP-TE signaling
    adjacencies as recommended in RSVP-TE Scaling Recommendations
    (draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec) will apply in scenarios other
    than RFC 4090 FRR using bypass tunnels. In scenarios involving RFC
    4090 FRR using bypass tunnels, additional explicit tear down
    messages are necessary. Refresh-interval Independent RSVP FRR (RI-
    RSVP-FRR) extensions specified in this document consists of
    procedures to enable LSP state cleanup that are essential in
    scenarios not covered by procedures defined in RSVP-TE Scaling
    Recommendations.

                                                                                  


Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

The IETF Secretariat